rant about GW and play testers

Something cool they could add, and stop me if I sound crazy here, is maybe have firing arcs for vehicle weapons, to give facing a bit of tactical depth? Maybe even have different saves on different vehicle facings, so that getting into a flanking position makes tactical difference?

Nah, that is crazy talk.

TeenageAngstIncubi

Posts : 1797Join date : 2016-08-29

Subject: Re: rant about GW and play testers Mon Jul 31 2017, 09:00

@FuelDrop the amount of hate I draw because I fire my Tantalus from the tippy top of its sail over buildings is palpable.

Or, and hold on to your hats folks, we could replace all these weapons that have randomly allocated shots with "blast markers" to represent how big the explosion is, and some randomised means of determining where this "blast marker" is placed that is affected by the ballistic skill of the shooter to represent where the shot lands.

_________________This world exists because of the things we have done, forever branching to the decisions we make and twisting to what we do not.

After playing some amount of games im actually feeling quite positive about 8th. And i dont really want to return to 7th. There are good things, and complexity that was removed from layers and layers of USRs are now in base ruleset. Many things i like, some i dont, but i hope they will be fixed some day.

Funny, the more I play the less I like it.

Quote :

I never once had a game where the decision was obvious, and things would not depend on your decisions. I had that feeling often in 7th.

That is literally every game of 8th for me. I've never had a "close game" with 8th. It's always extremely one-sided. Against drop-plasma and a Stormraven, I lost hard. Against Space Marine bikes, I won hard. Against brimstone spam and a Krieg army, I lost hard. Against suit Tau and Necrons, I won hard. Every game was decided by the end of turn 2 and after every game we realized there was literally nothing we could have done different to change the outcomes of any of those games, even after talking through the battle step by step.

Meanwhile in 7th almost every loss I had, even competitive losses, were very, very close games that were loads of fun to play.

Yes and I think this is where the big difference comes from, wether 8th works quite well or not at all.The problem is that it is badly balalanced if you spam stuff, then you get rock paper scissors. And the game is not fun. Only the Krieg army and necrons were not spam mentioned by you. (And there it might still be spam depending on what's in it. I find that in the games I played it often depended on the choices. But the only "spam" game I played was against a speed freak list (which was still quite up and down). For those who really play just to win the game is probably much worse, personally while there are things I think are not really well done, I prefer this over 7th.

FuelDropHekatrix

Posts : 1392Join date : 2015-06-21

Subject: Re: rant about GW and play testers Mon Jul 31 2017, 09:45

I have to say I look back on 5th very fondly...Less so later, when the really ridiculous stuff came out from Matt Ward, but for a lot of 5th things were pretty good.

Something cool they could add, and stop me if I sound crazy here, is maybe have firing arcs for vehicle weapons, to give facing a bit of tactical depth? Maybe even have different saves on different vehicle facings, so that getting into a flanking position makes tactical difference?

Nah, that is crazy talk.

They would then have to allow planes to exit the table. The only thing that makes supersonic planes viable in 8th is that you don't have to care about facing. Put it back, and we are left with huge garbage trucks that will never shoot at anything. Weapon facing does not serve any role in the balance of the game.

I'm 100% for the return of blasts and maybe templates. Those served a very important role in the balance of the game, and that role is now vacant.

AzdrubaelIncubi

Posts : 1761Join date : 2011-11-16Location : Russia

Subject: Re: rant about GW and play testers Mon Jul 31 2017, 14:44

Quote :

I'm 100% for the return of blasts and maybe templates.

You can homerule it and see what happens. All the profiles are still there - D3 for small blast, D6 for large blasts, hits automatically for templates.

_________________The Dance of Death begins - embraces, caresses, and kisses, The Harlequin loves you as you fall over in pieces!

TeenageAngstIncubi

Posts : 1797Join date : 2016-08-29

Subject: Re: rant about GW and play testers Mon Jul 31 2017, 15:43

Quote :

I find that in the games I played it often depended on the choices. But the only "spam" game I played was against a speed freak list (which was still quite up and down). For those who really play just to win the game is probably much worse, personally while there are things I think are not really well done, I prefer this over 7th.

Being near NOVA means I have a lot of competitive players in my day to day meta. Playing against these guys is how I learned to win. Now I'm just learning that only very, very specific builds are viable.

The Ynnari faction was introduced in a ham-fisted way that seemed to revolve around making everyone else look bad in order to make them look good. They set up an idiotic conflict in commorragh that leaves Vect and Malice both looking like morons, killed off an eldar craftworld for more or less kicks, and everyone seems to love them rather than taking one look at that walking abomination and jumping to the conclusion that it's some variant of a keeper of secrets, because that thing looks as Slaaneshi as frak.

I am more than open to the concept of a uniting force among the Eldar. I have no real problems with the mechanical implementation. I just very much dislike the handling of them lore wise, and the fact that they are likely to steal development time from either fleshing out the Dark Eldar or else from turning a background Xenos faction into a playable army, which would have been a solid alternative.

Ah, okay. I'd stopped playing 7th when Ynnari came out, so I didn't see much of them - let alone their fluff.

I never once had a game where the decision was obvious, and things would not depend on your decisions. I had that feeling often in 7th.

That is literally every game of 8th for me. I've never had a "close game" with 8th. It's always extremely one-sided. Against drop-plasma and a Stormraven, I lost hard. Against Space Marine bikes, I won hard. Against brimstone spam and a Krieg army, I lost hard. Against suit Tau and Necrons, I won hard. Every game was decided by the end of turn 2 and after every game we realized there was literally nothing we could have done different to change the outcomes of any of those games, even after talking through the battle step by step.

Meanwhile in 7th almost every loss I had, even competitive losses, were very, very close games that were loads of fun to play.

My experience with 7th was definitely very different to yours, in that a great deal of games were very one-sided.

That aside, my games in 8th could best be described as shallow. Like, there just haven't been many times when I've felt that I needed to make an important decision. Mostly they were just 'shoot the obvious target with the most appropriate weapon'. There were occasions when I needed to decide between two or more possible targets, but even then I can't attest that my choices made any significant difference to the outcome.

Something cool they could add, and stop me if I sound crazy here, is maybe have firing arcs for vehicle weapons, to give facing a bit of tactical depth? Maybe even have different saves on different vehicle facings, so that getting into a flanking position makes tactical difference?

Or, and hold on to your hats folks, we could replace all these weapons that have randomly allocated shots with "blast markers" to represent how big the explosion is, and some randomised means of determining where this "blast marker" is placed that is affected by the ballistic skill of the shooter to represent where the shot lands.

They would then have to allow planes to exit the table. The only thing that makes supersonic planes viable in 8th is that you don't have to care about facing. Put it back, and we are left with huge garbage trucks that will never shoot at anything. Weapon facing does not serve any role in the balance of the game.

Honestly, I'm of the opinion that planes just don't belong in this scale of game. The biggest indicator of this is the fact that they can barely move without going right off the edge of the table.

It reminds me of the joke my friends and I frequently make regarding the open-topped rule. We'll frequently have a vehicle with just a tiny portion of its hull exposed, which then proceeds to have the entire crew fire at a target. We have a running joke that the crew adopt a human-pyramid formation on that tiny area of hull so that they can all shoot.

CptMetalTrueborn

Posts : 2937Join date : 2015-03-03Location : Ruhr Metropolian Area

Subject: Re: rant about GW and play testers Mon Jul 31 2017, 17:23

If anybody tried this "I fire from the tip of the sail over this building" I would look at him as if he's insane.

I think that is the main reason why so many people don't understand you @TeenageAngstYou are playing a different game. Yes, what you do is covered in the rules and Technically okay but I'd never ever try this in my games. So maybe, we need a tighter rule set your those competitive players. The real tour crowd. People that have a different approach to this game and don't think in terms of "am I acting like a **** if I do this?"It's your right to play that way but I'd never play against such an unpleasant behavior.

Secondly: for me, the tactical depth is the same as last edition. There hadn't been stuff were I had ultra tough decisions to make that I can't do now anymore.

Third: I don't play Ynnari. SfD is too good and I want to keep my friends.

Don't take this as an insult angst, I just realized that both of us are playing different games and that you need a different and much tighter rule set because of your different approach to the game.

Anyone is welcome to make home rules in their own clubs to their hearts' content. Comp rules were flourishing everywhere and noone cared. Fandexes left and right. So if anyone has a group that wants to play 7th they are welcome to do so and even make tourneys. It is true that TA plays different game. Nothing wrong with that. Wrong is trying to tell us that the game we prefer is stupid and by extension we are.

CptMetalTrueborn

Posts : 2937Join date : 2015-03-03Location : Ruhr Metropolian Area

Subject: Re: rant about GW and play testers Mon Jul 31 2017, 18:40

Perhaps I came across as insulting. But I that hadn´t been my intention. I just wanted to point out that the idea of stretching everything as far as the rules allow, is not what I desire. That said: I play with friends not tournaments were there is money involved (not counting the costs of the miniatures).

This different approaches seem to explain TA reactions towards many of us (and mine towards hin): We are simply playing different games."Everything permitted in the rules, is okay" vs. "I don´t do stuff that I don´t want others to pull on me"

"Everything permitted in the rules, is okay" vs. "I don´t do stuff that I don´t want others to pull on me"

Well if he has the group he says he has, he is not pulling on them stuff he does not want them to pull on him. If they are all likeminded, everything is OK.

TeenageAngstIncubi

Posts : 1797Join date : 2016-08-29

Subject: Re: rant about GW and play testers Tue Aug 01 2017, 00:26

Quote :

People that have a different approach to this game and don't think in terms of "am I acting like a **** if I do this?"

Quote :

I'd never play against such an unpleasant behavior.

Quote :

If anybody tried this "I fire from the tip of the sail over this building" I would look at him as if he's insane.

Quote :

Don't take this as an insult angst

Oh, how could I ever misconstrue any of that as an insult, CptMetal?

I'm not playing a "different game", I am playing the game as it is written in the rulebook with no exceptions. Firing from "any point on the model" means any point, even the tip of the sail, which btw literally is a point. If there is a problem with that, then don't blame me, blame the rules that allow it to happen. Previous rules didn't. Previous rules made me face the boat at what I'm gonna shoot and then shoot it, drawing line of sight from the gun like would be reasonable and make sense. This common sense of pointing the gun at what you want to shoot at and then shooting from the gun was TOO COMPLEX for the feeble minds whom 8th courted and thus we have sail tips firing 12 S8 -3AP shots. When I play with Raiders I drive them sideways because it's frankly easier to measure their distance like that. Half their shots come out of their gangplanks because why not. That's 8th edition.

Quote :

Anyone is welcome to make home rules in their own clubs to their hearts' content. Comp rules were flourishing everywhere and noone cared. Fandexes left and right. So if anyone has a group that wants to play 7th they are welcome to do so and even make tourneys. It is true that TA plays different game. Nothing wrong with that. Wrong is trying to tell us that the game we prefer is stupid and by extension we are.

I have never seen anyone use homebrew rules or fandexes in any game I've played or watched. And I don't play a different game, I play the same game but literally. I read the rules, I apply the rules to the board. If what the rules allow upsets people, don't shoot the messenger.

I have never seen anyone use homebrew rules or fandexes in any game I've played or watched. And I don't play a different game, I play the same game but literally. I read the rules, I apply the rules to the board. If what the rules allow upsets people, don't shoot the messenger.

No? You have neve seen any comp rules on any tourney? Those ARE homebrew rules... But even if you mean just "regular" games - I'd say its your group's choice. If you really hate the game as much in its current state and your group too as you say, perhaps you should consider that... I mean DOING something instead of constant cries for your favourite toy and would-be logic about why you should get it your way. You won't... unless you do it yourself.

You do play a different game since you WANT to play a different game. If you don't see it, well you don't see it.

TeenageAngstIncubi

Posts : 1797Join date : 2016-08-29

Subject: Re: rant about GW and play testers Tue Aug 01 2017, 07:14

The problem is that unwritten rules have to be agreed upon ahead of time and I usually don't broker games and conditions. I usually just roll up to the shop with my army and play a pick up game with whoever. The moment a rule or restriction, such as firing arcs or blast templates or normally unallowed allies begins to affect them negatively, they're going to complain or refuse to play with/against it. That's just how it is, no one likes giving their opponent an unfair advantage that you weren't expecting them to have. Also I play primarily to be competitive so playing with rules and such that aren't allowed in tournament formats generally don't benefit my practice. When I did play fluffy, and I mean back in 7th edition before the lore turned into the blithering idiocy of what we have now, it was usually me borderline throwing the game at the listbuilding stage because of the nature of Dark Eldar at the time. It was still fun though because the fun I got out of it then wasn't winning but was instead seeing mostly unused models on the board and having them do neat things. Now they don't even do neat things anymore :/

Basically yeah I could come up with some basic rules that add something more to the game but the moment people start to feel disadvantaged by it they won't wanna play with them anymore so why even bother?